Please note: we have been online over ten years, and we want The Trek BBS to continue as a free site. But if you block our ads we are at risk.Please consider unblocking ads for this site - every ad you view counts and helps us pay for the bandwidth that you are using. Thank you for your understanding.

Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.

And what about Ripley? One of the most iconic and enduring female characters in cinema, almost unquestionably the most so in SF. Does Ripley speak loudly through being quiet and sensual? I don't think you can make any objectively persuasive claim of the kind you seem to be making.

Ripley in Alien is a perfect example of a strong lead female character, leagues above anything Kira and Seven can achieve combined.

She doesn't squark or throw tantrums to be heard. Your very own example proves my point.

It is just your relentless sentimental bias from watching DS9 and VOY that makes you fail to differentiate successful Hollywood movie characters to mediocre ones from TV shows that got cancelled.

Real women do not need to be confrontist to make a point or to make themselves heard.

Real women can be and do whatever they want.

Of course they can do what they want.

The point I am trying to make is the hardcore fancination of characters like Kira and Seven what with their relentless confrontational, 'tough-chic' and stiff personas, this is an example of how not have female characters on the big screen.

It is unconvincing, unlikable and unappealing and causes needless attrition to the viewer.

You just don't need that sort of mediocrity in a reboot that was supposed to save Star Trek.

So, your argument essentially is that "strong women" are off-putting, because men can't handle women who don't just roll over and meekly accept everything the big, strong men tell them to do?

Do you realize how sexist that sounds?

__________________Not affiliated with those other white knights. I'm the good kind.I has a blag.

Kira and Seven what with their relentless confrontational, 'tough-chic' and stiff personas, this is an example of how not have female characters on the big screen.

It is unconvincing, unlikable and unappealing and causes needless attrition to the viewer.

So, your argument essentially is that "strong women" are off-putting, because men can't handle women who don't just roll over and meekly accept everything the big, strong men tell them to do?

Is that what he's saying?

Do you realize how sexist that sounds?

Does it? I had a lot of the same problems with many of the female characters, particularly on DS9. "Tough chicks" as conceived by an all-male writing staff can indeed result in stiff and implausible characters. Then there were the "lipstick lesbians" of DS9's version of the Mirror Universe, who seemed to exist mainly because someone wanted to see Kira put the moves on Dax. "Intendent Kira" represented the conflation of homosexuality with general wickedness on a nearly Harkonnen level. Are you sure there's no stereotyping or sexism going on there?

Kira and Seven what with their relentless confrontational, 'tough-chic' and stiff personas, this is an example of how not have female characters on the big screen.

It is unconvincing, unlikable and unappealing and causes needless attrition to the viewer.

So, your argument essentially is that "strong women" are off-putting, because men can't handle women who don't just roll over and meekly accept everything the big, strong men tell them to do?

Is that what he's saying?

I'm not sure what he's saying, because he started off talking about how "real women" behave and painting with an extremely broad brush.

Do you realize how sexist that sounds?

Does it? I had a lot of the same problems with many of the female characters, particularly on DS9. "Tough chicks" as conceived by an all-male writing staff can indeed result in stiff and implausible characters. Then there were the "lipstick lesbians" of DS9's version of the Mirror Universe, who seemed to exist mainly because someone wanted to see Kira out the moves on Dax. "Intendent Kira" represented the conflation of homosexuality with general wickedness on a nearly Harkonnen level. Are you sure there's no stereotyping or sexism going on there?

See, I can't argue with that, because you articulated a fair criticism. I agree that that was some pretty egregious stereotyping.

But anh165's original point was made so broadly as to denigrate all strong female characters, not just ones written or portrayed poorly.

__________________Not affiliated with those other white knights. I'm the good kind.I has a blag.

It is just your relentless sentimental bias from watching DS9 and VOY that makes you fail to differentiate successful Hollywood movie characters to mediocre ones from TV shows that got cancelled.

Was never a huge fan of either of those shows, especially not Voyager. Try again? I'm not making any kind of case for Kira or Seven, I'm not particularly fond of them. It's your asinine twaddle about 'quiet and sensual' women being greatly preferred in other media that I'm taking issue with.

I'd like them do the opposite of the Avengers and split the crew up into their own solo adventures. This is the first time we've had a group of Trek actors who can and have headlined their own films and I'd love it if they capitalized on that to build the Trek brand and further develop the characters. In particular, Pine's Kirk and Quinto's Spock could each definitely carry a big budget film on their own, perhaps with Urban and Saldana costarring. But every one of them has the chops and recognition factor to at least open a smaller budgeted film- perhaps reuniting down the line Avengers style in a big Star Trek film on the Enterprise.

I understand plenty, like how backpedaling from a thoughtless and tasteless broad generalization makes one look unsavory.

The only thing you seemed to understand is the judicious use of insidious forum troll posting.

There is no broad generalisation, just a very specific swipe at poorly written and poorly acted female characters like those in DS9 and VOY, the sort of TV movie, direct-to-video quality that anyone with a creative mind would never put to the big screen.

Some of you chaps can defend poorly written and poorly acted female characters till the cows come home, at the end of the day all those high profile movies feature instantly engaging female characters , this works better than the irate and contentious women you find in DS9/VOY.

A good comedian should never have to explain their own jokes, same as a good singer on stage doenst need to be a total attention seeking try hard, you either have it in you to engage the viewer or you do not.

Janeway sucks but they can use the name cause it's cool and make a new character alongside TOS and TNG people. Then they go search some ultimate thing together all in the third movie. They should go big with the exploration adventure as there's been a lack lately.